Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2011 Aug;140(3):348–363. doi: 10.1037/a0022840

Table 1.

shape
similarity
function
similarity
color
similarity
manipulation
similarity
shape condition
(24 pairs)
6.2 (0.8) 1.1 (0.3) 2.8 (1.4) 2.0 ( 0.9)
function condition
(32 pairs)
1.7 (0.9) 6.3 (0.7) 4.0 (1.7) 4.0 (1.3)

Mean relatedness ratings for pairs used in Experiments 1 & 2. Standard deviations are in parentheses. Instructions were as follows: shape: “Picture the things that the words refer to and rate them according to how likely they are to be the same shape”; function: “Rate the following pairs of objects according to how similar their functions (i.e., purposes) are”; color: “Picture the objects that the words refer to and rate them according to how likely they are to be the same color”; manipulation: “Consider the typical movements you make when you use these objects and rate how similar the movements are.”